Agree that this is the wrong criterion to judge MC for. I've followed this player for years in the HTPC forums, and its strengths are that the developers actually listen to useful user requests, no matter if only a handful of people request it. That has made it the only (that I know of) commercial player for example to integrate madVR as a video renderer and ReClock-like abilities to its audio renderer, its developers having worked closely with madshi and James (developers of those filters). It has grown into the best featured player out there, no need for audiophool nonsense to hype it up.

It would be more interesting to tear that "Absolute Sound Magazine listening test" limb from limb.

Obviously, though I don't think the proxy server deserves a pass. We are not a religious-based community, and while people often find this kind of stuff entertaining, it almost never goes over well when someone submits this kind of nonsense and gives no indication that it shouldn't be taken seriously. I feel that it is fair to expect better from those representing commercial interests.

This post has been edited by greynol: Dec 7 2011, 20:26

--------------------

Breath is found in waveform and spectral plots;DR figures too, of course.

Regarding the statement saying that players sound alike, lets just say that I have passed an ABC test of three players where I could determine which player was playing the song we selected for the test. I guessed perfect in 15 times the song was being played. The three players were mediamonkey, Foobar, and J River. Try it yourself and you guys would be surprised at the differences between the players. Make sure to use good headphones of course when comparing them otherwise they will sound the same. I have noticed also that comparing directsound and wasapi within the same player is harder to ABX. I couldn't pass that test even though my first impression was that wasapi sounded smoother. This was either too small to maintain a constant correct guess or was purely placebo on my part as to their differences in sound.

I have a feeling that companies making their players add some sort of subtle yet hidden eq that cannot be bypassed to get their own house sound so to speak because the differences are pretty clear. JRiver is the bassiest, Foobar is thinner yet not so bright, and mediamonkey is slightly punchier than foobar with slightly more treble making the sound seem wider but is not as muddy in the bass as JRiver. I was using my hd600 with this test and I was not looking at the computer while my friend was picking the player to play the song.

That has made it the only (that I know of) commercial player for example to integrate madVR as a video renderer and ReClock-like abilities to its audio renderer, its developers having worked closely with madshi and James (developers of those filters). It has grown into the best featured player out there, no need for audiophool nonsense to hype it up.

Thanks. Just a minor correction. The Videoclock feature is ours, and not based on Reclock, though it has a similar purpose. We've also worked with babgvant and nevcairiel. It's been fun.

Since I'm not an audio expert (my background is primarily in networking technology, and slightly less in programming), all I can contribute is that a "64-bit internal data path" does nothing except optimize memory transactions. At best, it will improve the speed at which the program operates.

It cannot and will not have any direct affect on the decoded audio, unless the prior, 32-bit, implementation threw away data chunks or ordered them incorrectly. And I certainly hope that was not the case.

I think the important thing about the article in The Absolute Sound is that the entire audiophile community is now being exposed to computer audio in a way that will probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption. Until now, the merits of computer audio have been controversial for many audiophiles.

That whole paragraph is just wrong on so many levels.

"probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption" Oh great! And here was me thinking Audiofoolery was already plagued with far too much superstition and idiocy

I think the important thing about the article in The Absolute Sound is that the entire audiophile community is now being exposed to computer audio in a way that will probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption. Until now, the merits of computer audio have been controversial for many audiophiles.

That whole paragraph is just wrong on so many levels.

"probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption" Oh great! And here was me thinking Audiofoolery was already plagued with far too much superstition and idiocy

Audiophiles are (all) fools? Is that your point?

Whether you agree with them or not, and I suppose you may not, they still deserve your respect and consideration. They love what they do, just as you probably do.

They're on a quest for perfection. Sometimes they get a little off the path. That doesn't make them fools.

Whether you agree with them or not, and I suppose you may not, they still deserve your respect and consideration

Why do fools deserve my respect? A quest for a perfection is fine, but to claim as truth what is only experienced subjectively without ever being verified or even verifiable is nothing but foolishness. Do UFO "abductees" deserve my respect? They might deserve my consideration - as nutcases, but nothing more. I have for too long engaged in fruitless discussions to take any of the lot seriously.

Why do fools deserve my respect? A quest for a perfection is fine, but to claim as truth what is only experienced subjectively without ever being verified or even verifiable is nothing but foolishness. Do UFO "abductees" deserve my respect? They might deserve my consideration - as nutcases, but nothing more. I have for too long engaged in fruitless discussions to take any of the lot seriously.

Report button is for reporting spam or illegal content. Hydrogenaudio forum is about telling people the truth behind silly audiophile claims like player applications having different audio quality, not about hiding them like such claims do not exist. If someone was to google for this Absolute Sound Magazine listening test I'd like them to find a link to this forum where it is revealed to be bullshit. Not link to some nonsense forum where people blindly praise how superior JRiver player is.

Without seeing the complete article it is difficult to say anything about that test, but it looks seriously flawed. For example it claims that resampling from 176 kHz to 192 kHz or even just increasing the bit depth from 24-bit to 32-bit produces audibly better quality: "Additional height and clarity improvement."

Oh my god WHAT. I suppose they also think turning the volume up makes the sound higher quality, and dynamic range compression too. You'd think they would at least pick up the basics after devoting so much time and money to this.